News-Record.com

Odd article. What strikes me is the vitriolic tone of the article. Did he not consider any other 4th tier law schools which place their students in government positions? There are many schools in the 4th tier. Its simply the lowest tier, but they are not ranked within that tier. So his statement about "rock bottom" is ill-founded. There is still a lower tier of non-ABA accredited law schools. Let's remember that Regent has been around for a while and is accredited by the ABA. I suppose the fact that Clinton hired from the most liberal law schools in the country was perfectly valid? Please note that one didn't get a job in the Clinton administration unless you agreed with their political and religious views. The same with any president since Washington. But for some reason this poor excuse of jurist seems fit to criticize the practice since Christians are being placed in Government. Heaven forbid that a different world view govern the legal landscape in this country.

Its rather insulting to assume that the arbitrary ranking that is condemned universally by school administrators is his criteria for a quality hire. (see http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/06/20/usnews) What about a 3rd tier law school? Would that be acceptable? What a ridiculous display of ignorance and bigotry.

The author cites "Lawrence v. Kansas" as a sodomy law case and even suggests that Regent grad stated this was an actual case. There is no "Lawrence v. Kansas" dealing with sodomy laws. But there is Lawrence v. Texas 539 U.S. 558, 123 S.Ct. 2472 (U.S., 2003. Oh yeah, this author sure knows what he's talking about. Good thing he went to a higher tiered law school huh?

What might be a valid criticism is that there should always be variety in hiring and having 150 from one school may not be the best policy. But to suggest that a theocracy is underway is just absurd. And to demean those students who have worked hard to get into the school and graduate is simply shameful.